Voters in Britain's referendum need to understand that the European Union was about building a federal superstate from day one

By Prof Alan Sked

8:30AM GMT 27 Nov 2015

As the debate over the forthcoming EU referendum gears up, it would be wise perhaps to remember how Britain was led into membership in the first place. It seems to me that most people have little idea why one of the victors of the Second World War should have become almost desperate to join this "club". That's a shame, because answering that question is key to understanding why the EU has gone so wrong.

Most students seem to think that Britain was in dire economic straits, and that the European Economic Community – as it was then called – provided an economic engine which could revitalise our economy. Others seem to believe that after the Second World War Britain needed to recast her geopolitical position away from empire, and towards a more realistic one at the heart of Europe. Neither of these arguments, however, makes any sense at all.

When growth did happen, it did not come from the EU. From Ludwig Erhard's supply-side reforms in West Germany in 1948 to Thatcher's privatisation of nationalised industry in the Eighties, European growth came from reforms introduced by individual countries which were were copied elsewhere. EU policy has always been either irrelevant or positively detrimental (as was the case with the euro).

Nor did British growth ever really lag behind Europe's. Sometimes it surged ahead. In the 1950s Western Europe had a growth rate of 3.5 per cent; in the 1960s, it was 4.5 per cent. But in 1959, when Harold Macmillan took office, the real annual growth rate of British GDP, according to the Office of National Statistics, was almost 6 per cent. It was again almost 6 per cent when de Gaulle vetoed our first application to join the EEC in 1963.

In 1973, when we entered the EEC, our annual national growth rate in real terms was a record 7.4 per cent. The present Chancellor would die for such figures. So the economic basket-case argument doesn’t work.

What about geopolitics? What argument in the cold light of hindsight could have been so compelling as to make us kick our Second-World-War Commonwealth allies in the teeth to join a combination of Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Germany and Italy?

Four of these countries held no international weight whatsoever. Germany was occupied and divided. France, meanwhile, had lost one colonial war in Vietnam and another in Algeria. De Gaulle had come to power to save the country from civil war. Most realists must surely have regarded these states as a bunch of losers. De Gaulle, himself a supreme realist, pointed out that Britain had democratic political institutions, world trade links, cheap food from the Commonwealth, and was a global power. Why would it want to enter the EEC?

"Harold Macmillan and his closest advisers were part of an intellectual tradition that saw the salvation of the world in some form of world government"

The answer is that Harold Macmillan and his closest advisers were part of an intellectual tradition that saw the salvation of the world in some form of world government based on regional federations. He was also a close acquaintance of Jean Monnet, who believed the same. It was therefore Macmillan who became the representative of the European federalist movement in the British cabinet.

In a speech in the House of Commons he even advocated a European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) before the real thing had been announced. He later arranged for a Treaty of Association to be signed between the UK and the ECSC, and it was he who ensured that a British representative was sent to the Brussels negotiations following the Messina Conference, which gave birth to the EEC.

In the late 1950s he pushed negotiations concerning a European Free Trade Association towards membership of the EEC. Then, when General de Gaulle began to turn the EEC into a less federalist body, he took the risk of submitting a full British membership application in the hope of frustrating Gaullist ambitions.

His aim, in alliance with US and European proponents of a federalist world order, was to frustrate the emerging Franco-German alliance which was seen as one of French and German nationalism.

Monnet met secretly with Heath and Macmillan on innumerable occasions to facilitate British entry. Indeed, he was informed before the British Parliament of the terms in which the British approach to Europe would be framed.

Despite advice from the Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir, that membership would mean the end of British parliamentary sovereignty, Macmillan deliberately misled the House of Commons — and practically everyone else, from Commonwealth statesmen to cabinet colleagues and the public — that merely minor commercial negotiations were involved. He even tried to deceive de Gaulle that he was an anti-federalist and a close friend who would arrange for France, like Britain, to receive Polaris missiles from the Americans. De Gaulle saw completely through him and vetoed the British bid to enter.

Macmillan left Edward Heath to take matters forward, and Heath, along with Douglas Hurd, arranged — according to the Monnet papers — for the Tory Party to become a (secret) corporate member of Monnet’s Action Committee for a United States of Europe.

According to Monnet’s chief aide and biographer, Francois Duchene, both the Labour and Liberal Parties later did the same. Meanwhile the Earl of Gosford, one of Macmillan’s foreign policy ministers in the House of Lords, actually informed the House that the aim of the government’s foreign policy was world government.

"The Anglo-American establishment was now committed to the creation of a federal United States of Europe"

Monnet’s Action Committee was also given financial backing by the CIA and the US State Department. The Anglo-American establishment was now committed to the creation of a federal United States of Europe.

Today, this is still the case. Powerful international lobbies are already at work attempting to prove that any return to democratic self-government on the part of Britain will spell doom. American officials have already been primed to state that such a Britain would be excluded from any free trade deal with the USA and that the world needs the TTIP trade treaty which is predicated on the survival of the EU.

Fortunately, Republican candidates in the USA are becoming Eurosceptics and magazines there like The National Interest are publishing the case for Brexit. The international coalition behind Macmillan and Heath will find things a lot more difficult this time round — especially given the obvious difficulties of the Eurozone, the failure of EU migration policy and the lack of any coherent EU security policy.

Most importantly, having been fooled once, the British public will be much more difficult to fool again.

Alan Sked is the original founder of Ukip and professor of International History at the London School of Economics. He is presently collecting material for a book he hopes to publish on Britain's experience of the EU

Let’s cut the crap: Vladimir Putin is helping usher in the globalist New World Order (Part 3 – Veterans Today and dialectic propaganda)

On the morning the Turks downed the Russian airliner, I stumbled across this article from notorious disinformation mill Veterans Today…
It is such a good example of East/West dialectic propaganda and the “Putin as Savior” con that I decided it would be a good teaching tool for helping people to get real. And given all the confusing narratives that swirl around Putin and the current world situation, I think the best approach is to focus on two fundamental, telling things…

1) Putin’s cooperation in the globalists’ 9/11 operation, and

2) Putin’s promotion of the globalists’ UN as the solution to our current woes.

So let’s get started…

PUTIN AND 9/11

Even if one looks at Vladimir Putin from a naive, conventional perspective, he is a former KGB officer and is therefore fully familiar with the concept of false-flag terror. This being the case, it would not have escaped his attention that on the day of the 9/11 attacks, three New York high-rises fell after only two were hit by aircraft. So as an intelligence professional, he would have known that something was fishy on the very first day. And in the days following the attacks, Russian intelligence merged with holes in the US government’s official story would have made the inconsistencies quite glaring. This raises an obvious question…

Why did he spend the next 14 years playing along with the 9/11 “Official Story”?

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Putin stuck to the globalist talking points…
…From the BBC. Raw (untranslated) video of Putin making his remark on Bin Laden can be found here…
putbinyou

And here are some key excerpts from the BBC article along with my comments…

>>> No proof needed

Mr Putin, who is in Brussels for meetings with European Union and Nato leaders, told reporters: “For us it is already clear. The only thing we do not know is the exact role he (Bin Laden) played (in the terror attacks on America). <<<So>>> The Russian president criticised Saudi Arabia for refusing to let the US launch attacks against Afghanistan from bases on its territory. <<<So>>> BBC Europe correspondent Justin Webb says President Putin is likely to try to persuade EU leaders that they, in turn, must be more willing to accept that Russia needs the freedom to take what actions it deems necessary in its ongoing battle against rebels in Chechnya. <<<And> Putin and Bush together pressed “all countries” to join the war on “terrorism” after 9/11…
…From Kremlin.ru

> In the following month, November 2001, Putin visited the US and talked about Afghanistan during a speech at Rice University…
…From Kremlin.ru. So even by the Kremlin’s own words, he was supporting the US invasion of Afghanistan and calling Bush’s stance “well grounded.” Yep, that’s a real truth-teller for ya.
…From Kremlin.ru. If you read the article, you’ll see that he played it totally straight: he laid a wreath and expressed sorrow and solidarity over the “terrorist attack.”

> And Putin also sat for an interview with National Public Radio…
…From Kremlin.ru

I located the transcript of that interview on NPR.org. Here are two key excerpts…

>>> Question 17:

Mr. Siegel: President Bush now speaks of Osama bin Laden as “the evil one.” He uses the word “evil.” Is he also exaggerating now, and is it also a slogan for the day, or do you think that’s true?

President Putin: Actually, I think President Bush is being very mild in his choice of words. I have other definitions and epithets to offer, but I, of course, am being restrained by the fact that I am talking to the media and this is hardly appropriate.

The thing is that the people that you have just referred to, terrorists, especially terrorists who base themselves on man-hating fundamentalist ideas, these people, these terrorists, don’t really treat the rest of humanity as human beings. We are not even enemies, as far as they’re concerned. We’re just dust. We’re nothing and we’re a bunch of nobodies. And as people, these criminals deserve the most serious of attention and the most rigorous of treatment. <<<So>>> From the Question 18 answer:

President Putin: …And I’m not afraid to say that openly, and I can tell you why, because exactly two years ago Russia was the first to come across the kind of terrorism that the Americans had to deal with on Sept. 11. And, of course, the scale was not as large but it was just as horrendous, where, in downtown Moscow and in other cities of the Russian Federation, residential buildings, apartment buildings, were exploded. And as a result of those acts of terror, hundreds of completely innocent people died. <<<This>>> Mr Putin, in his turn, actively supported United Nations efforts against international terrorism, and stressed the necessity for all countries to comply with the resolutions and decisions of the UN Security Council and General Assembly. Mr Annan thanked Russia for its vanguard role in the UN’s fight against terrorism.

They also had a detailed discussion about the political settlement in Afghanistan and measures to prevent the country from turning into a hotbed of international terrorism. Mr Putin and Mr Annan agreed that decision-making on the future of Afghanistan was mainly up to Afghans with active assistance from the international community. <<<So>>> Terence James “Jim” O’Neill, Baron O’Neill of Gatley (born 17 March 1957), retiring chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, is a British economist best known for coining BRIC, the acronym that stands for Brazil, Russia, India, and China—the four rapidly developing countries that have come to symbolise the shift in global economic power away from the developed G7 economies…

He joined Goldman Sachs in 1997 and he was appointed as the head of global economics research in 2001, which is also when he published the seminal BRIC paper…

On 28 May 2015 he was created a Life Peer as Baron O’Neill of Gatley, of Gatley in the County of Greater Manchester. <<<Isn>>> Putin said Russia agrees with United States that it is important to “make sure that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction in its possession.” But he added that “we do believe that we have to stay within the framework of the work being carried out within the United Nations.” <<<Now> As the article states, the Iraq War was facing domestic criticism, so Putin said what was needed to help fend off opposition to the war on terror agenda. Since the globalists still had several years worth of work to do in the Middle East, Putin had to help keep the operation on track.

> At the same time, he had to keep up the public stance of opposing the war so the dialectic conflict agenda could continue to develop. At the time the CNN article was written, there was still two years to go until the BRIC nations held their first unofficial meeting at the UN.

So by talking opposition from one side of his mouth and providing support from the other side of his mouth, Putin followed the globalist plan to a T.

A few years later, the East/West dialectic began to take material form. Here is something from the Kremlin website on “Cooperation within BRIC”…

>>> Political dialogue within the BRIC format began in New York in September 2006, when their foreign ministers conferred during the 61st UN General Assembly. Since then, the BRIC foreign ministers have met four times, including at a full-scale meeting in Yekaterinburg on May 16, 2008. The joint statement adopted as a result of the latter meeting formulated common approaches to crucial issues on the international agenda. <<<So>>> …what is happening in today’s world – and we just started to discuss this – is a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.

And with which results?

Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts – even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!

Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.

We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?…

[In these paragraphs, Putin introduces the PROBLEM: a United States that is running wild in the world trying to impose a unilateral order. He also expresses the collective REACTION (“This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?”). Watch now as he promotes the SOLUTION: the BRIC alliance, multipolarity, and the UN…]

…The combined GDP measured in purchasing power parity of countries such as India and China is already greater than that of the United States. And a similar calculation with the GDP of the BRIC countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China – surpasses the cumulative GDP of the EU. And according to experts this gap will only increase in the future.

There is no reason to doubt that the economic potential of the new centres of global economic growth will inevitably be converted into political influence and will strengthen multipolarity.

In connection with this the role of multilateral diplomacy is significantly increasing…

I am convinced that the only mechanism that can make decisions about using military force as a last resort is the Charter of the United Nations. And in connection with this, either I did not understand what our colleague, the Italian Defence Minister, just said or what he said was inexact. In any case, I understood that the use of force can only be legitimate when the decision is taken by NATO, the EU, or the UN. If he really does think so, then we have different points of view. Or I didn’t hear correctly. The use of force can only be considered legitimate if the decision is sanctioned by the UN. And we do not need to substitute NATO or the EU for the UN. When the UN will truly unite the forces of the international community and can really react to events in various countries, when we will leave behind this disdain for international law, then the situation will be able to change. <<<So> According to the BRIC alliance, what kind of world order should we have?…

“The Ministers reiterated that today’s world order should be based on the rule of international laws and the strengthening of multilateralism with the United Nations playing the central role.”

One with the globalists’ UN playing the central role.

> According to the BRIC alliance, how do you make the UN stronger like Putin suggested at Munich?…

“They reaffirmed the need for a comprehensive reform of the UN with a view to making it more efficient so that it can deal with the current global challenges more effectively. The Ministers of Russia and China reiterated that their countries attach importance to the status of India and Brazil in international affairs, and understand and support India’s and Brazil’s aspirations to play a greater role in the United Nations.”

Translation: “Reform it by giving the rest of the BRIC nations permanent seats on the UN Security Council.”

> According to the BRIC alliance, how do we solve the world’s economic malaise?…

“The Ministers noted that sustainable development of global economy in the long-term as well as finding solutions to the acute global problems of our time, such as poverty, hunger and diseases are only possible if due account is taken of the interests of all nations and within a just global economic system…

The Ministers spoke in favour of intensifying the dialogue to achieve the internationally agreed development goals, primarily the Millennium Development Goals, on the basis of global partnership for development. They supported international efforts to combat hunger and poverty.”

By conforming to the UN’s Sustainable Development rules and reaching the UN’s Millennium Development Goals of course.

> According to the BRIC alliance, how do you end the scourge of terrorism?…

“The Ministers unequivocally condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, committed for whatever purposes. They reiterated that terrorism constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and that the international community should take necessary steps to enhance cooperation to prevent and combat terrorism. They particularly highlighted the importance of the UN cooperation framework and the need for all member states to implement international conventions of the United Nations and UN Security Council resolutions on fighting terrorism.

The Ministers emphasized the importance of the implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in all its aspects and expressed their opinion that all member states should make concerted efforts towards expeditious finalization of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism at the UN.”

So we end globalist organized and funded terrorism by fully complying with the globalist UN’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Why didn’t I think of that?!

> According to the BRIC alliance, is manmade climate change for real?…

“The Ministers spoke in favour of strengthening international cooperation to address climate change in the context of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol. They expressed their desire to work closely together in order to carry out the Bali Action Plan.”

It was after this joint BRIC statement was released that the Kremlin posted the “Cooperation within BRIC” statement, and the latter contains a passage that we also need to see…

“BRIC is a loose group of countries including Brazil, Russia, India and China, the largest economic growth and political influence centres among emerging economies. These countries have a substantial integration potential in their respective regions.”

So what do the Russians mean by “substantial integration potential in their respective regions”? They are talking about a BRIC role in helping integrate the world’s nations into the United Nations Development Regions…
Take a moment to think about the continents of the world:

In North America, the globalists have the US to lead the UN integration effort;
in Western Europe, they have the EU to lead the integration.

Now let’s add the BRICS…

In Eurasia (the middle part of the Europe/Asia landmass), they have Russia to lead the integration;
in Asia, they have China and India to lead the integration;
in South America, they have Brazil to lead the integration;
in Africa, they have South Africa to lead the integration.

Can you see how the BRIC alliance helps pull the developing world into the UN’s regional system?

With all this laid before us, we see that Putin and his BRICS alliance are helping bring in a New World Order centered on a region-based United Nations. And in doing this, they are stopping the evil plans of the Western globalists, right?

Wrong.

The Western globalists’ plan for the New World Order has always called for it to be UN-centered and region-based. They published the blueprint for it back in 1961, and here are some excerpts from pages 35 and 26 (please pardon my crooked scanning)
Can you guess from which book these excerpts were taken? It was this one…
…And it was the result of a Rockefeller-funded initiative called the Special Studies Project.

Can you guess who was the director of the Project? It was Vladimir Putin’s personal friend, Henry Kissinger
…From the New York Times

So Putin is helping implement the NWO his pal Henry Kissinger helped design back in 1956
…To learn more about this subject, read The Rockefeller Plan for the BRICS New World Order, in their own words…

Now that I’ve shown you what Putin and the BRICS are up to — using their own verifiable words — it’s time to state the obvious…

PUTIN’S CULT OF PERSONALITY AND THE BRICS ALLIANCE
ARE BOTH GLOBALIST FRONTS
PURPOSE-BUILT TO DRAW THE WORLD INTO THE NEW WORLD ORDER
BY CONVINCING THE PEOPLE THE EVIL WESTERN GLOBALISTS HAVE BEEN STOPPED
AND THE IMPERIALIST POWERS HAVE BEEN DEFEATED.

If this reality causes you to lose your false hope, good. False hope must be released in order to grasp on to true hope. And false solutions must be rejected in order to make way for real solutions.

Umm, Fintan, he's just using VT as an example of the disinfo war that is going on with regard to Putin being the "good guy", that's all, not reason to get all excited about it. Now, could you also adress the other points he's raising in this article, because it is definitely not about VT but about Putin's role on the world stage until now. Like, if he's such a good guy coming to the rescue of the world, why isn't he exposing the 9/11 scam and all the rest of it, but instead playing along with the west's BS version of 9/11. That I would find much more interesting.
Btw, it's going to be very, very interesting what stance Putin is going to take on AGW during the COP21 (cop21, what's in a name?)._________________"A person hears only what he understands."
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Excellent interview with Michael Tsarion by David Whitehead (truth warrior). In Tsarion's opinion, all roads lead to Rome, meaning that in the end he thinks it's the Vatican that's behind most of the mayhem in the world. This would mean that Zionism, communism, neo-liberalism and all other isms are all tools in the great game the "Holy See" is playing. Why? They're pissed off because they have lost a great deal of their former worldly and especially spiritual power due to secular trends since the Enlightenment and the French revolution. By taking the process to its destructive end (god is dead and all that) and by letting western man drown in consumerism and other empty life styles with no real purpose they hope to break his spirit and make him return to the "holy church". Tsarion argues that in the end Islam and Judaism and their crazy ideologies are under the control of the Vatican and are being used right now to bring western man to even greater despair. Imo its strange that they would have allowed for these secular trends to happen if they could have helped it. Obviously this means that not everything is under their control; Tsarion discusses the internecine ongoings in the Vatican as well in the link to an article called the red papacy. On the other hand, this is an institution that has been around for two millenia and is still alive and kicking, quite a feat in this world, especially in this day and age. All in all, absolutely worth your while, lot's of historical background to all this, Tsarion is definitely worth listening to;

Although the man was an absolute war criminal he had some amazing insights;
“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.”
Winston Churchill_________________"A person hears only what he understands."
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

5 Signs That Benjamin Netanyahu's Split With Israel Security Chiefs Is a Crisis

J.J. Goldberg

As Israel’s current wave of terrorist violence enters its third month, long-simmering tensions between the country’s political leadership and its security branches are escalating and approaching what feels like a crisis level.

True, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his allies have clashed with Israel’s defenders repeatedly — on Iran, the Palestinians, the Obama administration — since Netanyahu took office in 2009. What’s different now is the sheer number of disputes erupting simultaneously, in broad daylight, across an array of issues, at a moment of dangerous chaos at home and regionally.

Seldom, if ever, have Israel’s decision-makers been so sharply at odds with their professional watchdogs on so many critical issues. The prime minister has staked out a position on the nature of Islamist terrorism that’s fundamentally at odds with his own intelligence community. Other questions in dispute include the causes of the current violence and strategies for containing it, the advisability of goodwill gestures toward the Palestinians, and the feasibility of resuming peace talks.

Netanyahu and his allies generally believe that the Palestinian terror wave, which began in October, is fueled by deep-seated hatred of Israel and Jews, with incitement by Palestinian leaders providing the spark. Most believe that only iron-fist tactics will restore calm. But Israel’s intelligence agencies maintain that while incitement plays a role, the young attackers are driven as much or more by frustration over the circumstances of their lives — personal, economic and national. Taking their cues from social media, they act independently and often spontaneously.

Against that backdrop, the insults have been flying fast and furious for weeks. Consider five recent events:

1. On November 3, the army’s analysis of Palestinian violence was presented to the security Cabinet in a briefing by the chief of Military Intelligence, Maj. Gen. Herzl Halevi. According to leaked accounts of the top-secret session, a junior minister, Ze’ev Elkin of the Likud’s rising settler wing, charged Halevi with acting as a “spokesman for the Palestinians.”

2. On November 17 the government outlawed the militant, fundamentalist Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement, ignoring the assessment of the Shin Bet security service that banning the Galilee-based movement would inflame Arab Israeli citizens, drive the group underground and make its actions harder to monitor.

3. On November 23, Education Minister Naftali Bennett called on the army in a radio interview to launch “a sort of Operation Defensive Shield 2.” He was referring to Israel’s massive 2002 West Bank offensive to crush the leadership of the second intifada. Bennett’s call for more aggressive military action reawakened still-raw resentments among the army brass over his accusations during the 2014 Gaza War that the generals were too timid to crush Hamas. Some officers now accuse Bennett of messianic delusions.

4. On November 25, an unidentified “senior officer” from the army’s Central Command, which covers the West Bank, briefed reporters on a series of measures the Israel Defense Forces was recommending to the government to ease conditions for Palestinians and thus reduce the violence. Proposals included initiating a limited prisoner release; increasing the number of West Bank Palestinians permitted to work in Israel, and issuing construction permits for Palestinians living in Area C, the part of the West Bank under full Israeli control. Also recommended: transferring new stocks of light weapons, ammunition and armored vehicles to the Palestinian Authority security forces, in order to assist the authority’s counterterrorism efforts in coordination with the Israeli military.

The prime minister’s office promptly ruled out the army’s recommendations. Critics said concessions would “reward terror.” But that wasn’t the end of it. The “senior officer” was outed by a far-right Jewish Home lawmaker as Maj. Gen. Roni Numa, chief of the IDF Central Command. A social media campaign promptly began calling for Numa to be fired, and he was forced to meet with settler leaders to disavow the recommendations.

5. The terror wave has also allowed Netanyahu to reopen an old debate with the military over the nature of terrorism. He’s been insisting for nearly two years that Hamas, Hezbollah, the Islamic State group, Al Qaeda and other Islamist terror groups are all “branches of the same poison tree.” Following the November 13 Paris attacks, he offered a variation on the theme, declaring that the current Palestinian terrorism is “the same terror” and “the same radical Islam that struck in Paris and threatens all of Europe.”

His point is that since Israel faces the same enemy, it deserves the same sympathy and should be granted the same latitude to hit back hard. It’s an approach that has found considerable support among mainstream American Jewish organizations. B’nai B’rith International’s executive vice president, Daniel Mariaschin, echoed Netanyahu in a November 17 JTA essay, writing that “terror is terror.” David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee made a similar point even before the Paris terror attacks, lamenting “the world’s silence” on Israel’s suffering in an October 11 Huffington Post blog. Jonathan Greenblatt, rookie national director of the Anti-Defamation League, went even further, arguing in a November 23 Forward essay against the very idea of exploring “root causes” or seeking via “political action” to solve the problem of a seamless worldwide “Islamic terrorism.”

Despite its popularity, though, the Netanyahu approach directly contradicts the view of Israel’s defense and intelligence agencies. They’ve maintained publicly for several years that Sunni Hamas, Shi’ite Hezbollah and “global jihad” groups like Islamic State and Al Qaeda are actually three quite distinct phenomena that require three different responses. The jihadists are beyond negotiating, but Hamas and Hezbollah, with their respective allies, can be deterred or brought into tacit understandings. Fatah, despite its flirtations with Hamas, is in a fourth category, together with Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, pragmatic powers with which agreements are possible.

As for the current terror plaguing Israel, it’s a different creature altogether, since it lacks any organizing structure or ideology. That was the point Halevi made to the Cabinet in his tense appearance November 3. It’s a point the Shin Bet hammered home in a report published November 10. It’s a point the government, particularly its right flank, desperately doesn’t want to accept.

Taken together, the current disputes point to a collapsing Israeli national consensus and the beginnings of an existential battle to choose the future. Israel has been guided for two generations by a notion that the status quo in the West Bank was sustainable, that Israel could indefinitely defer a decision on its relationship with the Palestinians, that the country was safer holding the territory than relinquishing it, that the strong arm of the military could keep it secure.

For most Israelis, it was convenient to believe in this consensus. For the settler movement and its allies on the right, it was an existential necessity. Now the army is warning that the world has changed, the status quo no longer holds and hard decisions must be made. It shouldn’t surprise us that those with the most to lose are resisting the advice.

Over recent times here some posters believe Putin is still just part of the NWO / banking cartel playing his role.

NOT SO, according to the Saker. This good article explaining the juggling act Putin has to play to break away from what he calls the “Atlantic Integrationists” part of the Anglo Zionist Empire.

Quote:

The Atlantic Integrationists are still in full control of the Russian financial and banking sector, of all the key economic ministries and government positions, they control the Russian Central Bank and they are, by far, the single biggest threat to the rule of Putin and those supporting him. Considering that roughly 90% of Russians now support Putin, that means that these Atlantic Integrationists are the single biggest threat to the Russian people and Russia as a whole.

Wait, wait, hold on guys, Putin is a good guy it's just that "The Atlantic Integrationists are still in full control of the Russian financial and banking sector, of all the key economic ministries and government positions, they control the Russian Central Bank and they are, by far, the single biggest threat to the rule of Putin and those supporting him. Considering that roughly 90% of Russians now support Putin, that means that these Atlantic Integrationists are the single biggest threat to the Russian people and Russia as a whole."

Ok?! Also from the article; "Putin is a very good man in charge of a very bad system." Aha right so that's it, it's not his fault it's the system's fault (of which he happens to be the president!).

Tom from redefininggod.com has already given an explanation to all of this, in which he directly addresses the saker's article (for the accompanying videos see the original article at http://redefininggod.com/. Here it is;

Quote:

Globalist Prophecy Watch: Update 3 – Is Vladimir Putin the Jewish Messiah? (Continued 6 – Putin is both a Jew and a “Christian”)

The “Saker” article to which he refers is just a reapplication of the East/West dialectic that makes excuses for Putin. Such articles are designed to give those who are starting to question Putin a plausible narrative that explains-away the discrepancies they’re seeing between his pro-NWO actions and his manufactured anti-NWO cult of personality.

Propagandists know that people want to hold on to their comforting illusions (such as the illusion that Putin is a really nice guy who is going to save us from the evil globalists), so if you give them any halfway-plausible excuse to cling to the illusion (with a make-believe narrative like the “Saker’s”), most will do so. Note how Makow models this dynamic with his first paragraph: he poses as a person who is starting to question Putin, but is reassured by the “Saker’s” article.

The article did, however, contain one idea that got my attention, which I’ll paraphrase here…

“Putin is a very good man in charge of a very bad system, and he is playing along with the globalists until he can arrange the right opportunity to strike.”

Upon seeing this and connecting it to the two prophecy videos I was writing about, I realized Putin was being groomed to be the Jewish Messiah / Christian Antichrist figure who’ll be unveiled next September. To show you all the reasons I strongly suspect this, let me take you through a series of points that establish the qualifications for the Jewish Messiah, then we’ll look at how Putin measures up to these expectations.

QUALIFICATIONS OF THE MASHIACH (the Jewish Messiah)

Before we begin, it’s important to set aside any pet theories you might have about how the End Times will unfold. All Biblical arguments over how to properly interpret the prophecies don’t amount to a hill of beans in this. Since the globalists are the ones running this show, the only interpretations that matter are the ones the they are promoting to the public, for those are the ones they intend to fulfill in the three leaders they present to us. That being said, let’s have a look at…

Point 1 – Recent Israeli prophetic propaganda establishes some notable expectations for the Mashiach. The first “prophetic” video I want to show you is actually an interrelated pair of videos, and they were brought to my attention by a reader a few days ago. The first video of the pair shows the testimony of an Israeli boy, Natan, who supposedly died for 15 minutes and was shown how the “End Times” would unfold for Israel. Natan tells us two notable things about the Mashiach.

“Natan: And what I saw was simply that…the Mashiach is first of all someone who can’t sin. Someone who repented. Who didn’t commit any transgressions.

Rabbi: He repented?

Natan: He repented. Yes. He didn’t commit any transgressions. He didn’t commit any transgressions. Since he repented, he didn’t commit even one transgression. It can’t be that the Mashiach is someone who committed transgressions.“

So with this statement, Natan establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 1: He a repentant sinner who has committed no sin since he repented.

Here is the second thing Natan says about the Mashiach…

“Now, it can be someone who we actually know very well, who we know very well. Lots and lots of people know him, according to what I understood. But, everyone will be very, very surprised, that he is of all people the Mashiach.

Also, now, this Mashiach, I mean the Mashiach – he will fight against Obama. And not only that – he will kill him and bury him in the Land of Israel.”

So with this statement, Natan establishes two more qualifications…

Mashiach Qualification 2: He is a man everyone will recognize, and everyone will be surprised that he, of all people, is the Mashiach.

…and…

Mashiach Qualification 3: He is a man who will fight Obama in the final conflict.

It is also Natan’s testimony that Obama is the man who starts the Gog/Magog (West/East) War, and that he will lead the following war against Israel. So Obama is playing the “Antichrist” role to the Mashiach. As the Jew who produces the Torah Codes has stated…

…From ArkCode.com

Setting aside whether or not I find Natan’s testimony credible (I don’t), the reason this video is important is that the End Times script it offers is being promoted by Messianic Jewish propaganda figures like the man in the second video of the pair, Steven Ben-Nun…

Let’s have a look at how Ben-Nun supports and spins Natan’s testimony about the Mashiach in his video commentary: at the 41:34 mark of the video, he begins to talk about the qualifications established by Natan and goes on to say this about the “no transgressions” part…

“You know, friends, the only one that I know of that didn’t commit transgressions in this earth is Yeshua.”

He then goes on to say this about the “everyone will recognize him” part…

“And who is the only one that can fit that particular category? It’s Yeshua! Because many, many people know him, and the Jews know him as well…”

So Ben-Nun uses Natan’s testimony to suggest that the Mashiach will be the second coming of Jesus, and that should come as no surprise to anyone who has been observing the Synagogue of Satan vs. Jesus Christ dialectic. The Occulted Powers’ script has called for the Jews to infiltrate and subvert the “true Christian church,” and that’s exactly what they’ve been doing. In fact, I covered a specific instance of this in a previous entry: Meet Robert Lawrence Kuhn, Illuminati handler of China’s leaders (Update 1 – More on Kuhn and the Worldwide Church of God). And according to the globalist playbook, the ultimate goal of the Synagogue of Satan is to get the Christians to serve Satan and accept the Antichrist, which is why Ben-Nun equates the Mashiach with Jesus.

Now if we take a moment to think about this, we realize that if the globalists present the Mashiach as both the Jewish AND the Christian messiah, he would have to be BOTH a Jew AND a Christian. If he were only a Jew, the Christians would feel alienated from him, and if he were only a Christian, the Jews would feel the same. The only way to unite both religions behind the one messiah (like the globalists want to do) is to present him as being of both religions. And this establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 4: He is both a Jew and a Christian.

With these first four qualifications established, let’s move on to…

Point 2 – Recent Christian prophetic propaganda establishes a key expectation for the Mashiach. Right after I encountered the Natan and Ben-Nun videos, I stumbled upon an interview of Tom Horn, one of the leading Christian End Times propagandists...

Starting at the 8:02 mark of the video, Horn talks about how dozens of Christian seers over the past 200 years have said that the Antichrist would appear on the Earth in the year 2016. He also talks about how the Jews are expecting the imminent arrival of their messiah, and since the orthodox Jews are the ones who rejected Jesus Christ, Horn says, their messiah would be the Antichrist. In the midst of all this, he mentions a specific Jewish prophecy from the Zohar…

“…in a section in the Zohar called the ‘Vaera’ section, there’s a subsection called ‘Signs Heralding Mashiac or the Coming of the Messiah.’ And in this 700 year-old Jewish document, it says when the Messiah would appear first privately to the rabbis in Israel. Guess when it said that would happen. 700 years ago it said it would happen in the Jewish calendar year 5773, which in our Gregorian calendar started in the middle of 2012 into 2013.”

Upon looking up a calendar for 5773, I found that it actually started in September of 2012, not the “middle of 2012″ as Horn states, so what are we to make of this discrepancy? Given that Horn is working for the globalists, he is fudging the numbers so the Zohar prophecy will fit the man they intend to put forward as the Mashiach. So this establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 5: He is a man who was in Israel at some point from the middle of 2012 into 2013.

After offering this qualification, Horn goes on to say what would happen after the Mashiach reveals himself privately to the rabbis…

“And then it said shortly thereafter, he will start making himself known to the nations of the world.”

Since this supposedly occurred back in 2012-2013, it stands to reason that the Mashiach is already internationally known by now. And given that the Mashiach will fight Obama in the final conflict, it also stands to reason that he is someone who is already working in opposition to Obama’s actions on the world stage. This establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 6: He is an internationally known opponent of Obama.

So we’ve already identified six qualifications for the Mashiach by observing globalist preparatory propaganda. Now let’s look for more clues in other places…

Point 3 – Since the Mashiach is being put forward by the Occulted Powers in order to further their agenda, we can uncover more qualifications by reviewing what we know about their agenda and applying a little logic and common sense.

> First, let’s consider the globalists’ intention to unite the Jews and Christians under the Mashiach figure. Given that…

1) The globalists are selling the arrival of the Mashiach as the second coming of Christ,
2) Christ is the world’s ultimate cult of personality, and
3) the Mashiach is already internationally known,

…it stands to reason that the globalists would develop a positive, savior-like cult of personality around him so he could “fill Jesus’ shoes.” It further stands to reason that they would develop a negative, devil-like cult of personality around his dialectic opponent, Barack Obama. This establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 7: He is a man who’s had a very positive cult of personality built around him – he is the opposite of Obama.

> Next, let’s consider the globalists’ effort to stage a dialectic struggle between an evil Western NWO and a “benevolent” Eastern NWO. Given that…

1) Obama is portrayed as the leader of the attempt to complete a scary unipolar NWO, and
2) the BRICS are portrayed as leading an attempt to build a welcoming multipolar NWO,

…it stands to reason that the Mashiach is involved in the BRICS effort to bring in the mulitpolar NWO. This establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 8: He is a man who is playing a leading role in the BRICS effort to build a New World Order.

> Finally, let’s consider the globalists’ effort to convince the public that extraterrestrials have been visiting Earth, and their intention to use a simulated alien arrival to provide the “WOW” factor in the Mashiach’s unveiling. Given that…

1) the rabbit hole alternative media have promoted the idea that evil lizards from outer space have allied with the United States, and
2) they’ve also promoted the idea that “positive” human extraterrestrials are working to stop the American/Space Lizard evil agenda,

…it stands to reason that the Mashiach is in cahoots with the “positive” aliens. This establishes…

Mashiach Qualification 9: He is a man who has been portrayed as being connected with “positive” extraterrestrial forces.

Now that we’ve reached the magic number 9, I think we have enough qualifications to get a good idea of who the Mashiach might be. So let’s turn our attention to how Vladimir Putin measures up to these standards…

HOW PUTIN MATCHES THE MASHIACH PROFILE

Mashiach Qualification 1: He a repentant sinner who has committed no sin since he repented.

This qualification opens the door for Putin (and any backup candidates the globalists may have groomed) to step forward as the Mashiach. Since Putin has an impure history, it will be said that he repented at some point and was washed clean of his sins, so it is as if they never happened. They will say he had to do impure things in order to work within an impure system, but once he ascended within the system to a point that he could afford to be his authentic self, he left his mask of sin behind and acted in accordance with who he truly is.

It is ironic that since he will be promoted as the second coming of Jesus, he will be washed clean of his sins by his own blood. That seems kinda freaky, but I suppose it’s more hygienic than being washed in someone else’s blood. You wouldn’t want to shed your sins only to end up getting spiritual hepatitis.

Mashiach Qualification 2: He is a man everyone will recognize, and everyone will be surprised that he, of all people, is the Mashiach.

If Putin were to emerge from a (holographically projected) dimensional gate on the Mount of Olives as Natan and Ben-Nun suggest, everyone would indeed recognize him, wouldn’t they? And everyone would be quite surprised that he was the Mashiach all along. Although Ben-Nun has suggested that Jesus will emerge from the gate, no one really knows what Jesus looked like, so he would be a stranger to everyone’s eyes. But if Putin emerges with the implication that he is both the Mashiach and the recurrence of Christ, everyone will recognize him and be satisfied.

Mashiach Qualifications 3 & 6: He is an internationally known opponent of Obama who will fight Obama in the final conflict (of 2016).

Who is Obama’s main opponent on the global stage? If you were to ask this question to any person on the street, the answer you would get is “Vladimir Putin.”

Who is the leader who will fight Obama in World War 3? If you were to ask this question also, you would get the same answer, “Vladimir Putin.”

The mainstream and alternative media are chock-full of stories about Putin’s opposition to Obama’s global moves, as well as stories that warn about conventional and nuclear war between America and Russia. This huge media effort leaves no doubt about who Obama’s nemesis is..

Mashiach Qualification 4: He is both a Jew and a Christian.

The more I research this qualification, the more I see and the more I need to write. It appears that the Cabalist Jews effectively rebooted Russia with the Communist Revolution. They all but shut down the Russian Orthodox Church, then later reopened it with clergy that was hand-picked by the KGB. One would imagine that they tweaked the Church doctrine as well, to make it Cabalist-compliant. So if the Church is now under Jewish control, it is no wonder the Jewish Putin would have no problem being both a Jew and a Russian Orthodox “Christian.”

The Cabalists may have also killed-off unruly elements of the Tsarist bloodlines and intermarried with those who remain, effectively rebooting the Russian royals too. Once the mysterious genealogy of Vladimir Putin is revealed, we may find out that he is both a descendant of the Tsars and of King David, the latter of which qualifies him to be the Mashiach.

Once I put together all the documentation, I’ll post it here, then I’ll move on with the remainder of this entry. Till then, you might want to have a look at this: Vladimir (Ras)Putin’s Jewish, Communist, and Bloodline Connections (Update 2: Is Putin related to the European royals?)

To be continued. There is much, much more to come…

Personaly I'm getting more and more under the impression that the Jews are just another front for the real power behind it all, the Vatican..
see; Did the Vatican create Islam?_________________"A person hears only what he understands."
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe